| From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Michael Loftis <mloftis(at)wgops(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: timeout implementation issues |
| Date: | 2002-04-10 00:27:01 |
| Message-ID: | 200204100027.g3A0R1929901@candle.pha.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
> > > Oops does the first mean rolling back the variables on abort ?
> > > If so I made a mistake. The current is better than the second.
> >
> > The second means all SET's are rolled back on abort.
>
> I see.
> BTW what varibles are rolled back on abort currently ?
Currently, none, though the SET commands after the query aborts are
ignored, which is effectively the same as rolling them back.
BEGIN WORK;
SET x=3;
failed query;
SET x=5;
COMMIT;
In this case, x=3 at end of query.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Hiroshi Inoue | 2002-04-10 00:46:43 | Re: timeout implementation issues |
| Previous Message | Hiroshi Inoue | 2002-04-10 00:25:50 | Re: timeout implementation issues |